About your Search

20120930
20121008
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
in the latest job report and showing a dip in the unemployment. former chairman jack welch is skeptical. meaning that employers added a modest 114,000 jobs and the drop comes at a critical time for the president who is coming off a weak debate performance with romney. joining us is new york times best selling author out with the latest book. ann coulter. at this point in time the president said we will be at 5.6 and enjoying that part of the economy and a more comfortable position and now they are running with this new number. what is your response. >> it is noticeable that a lot of economist are saying this is not possible. you would need more than 114,000 jobbings. i don't think it matters except to broadcasting tv shows or writing for newspaper what number they throw up on the screen. people know they are out of work and in jobs and they are way overqualified for and working part-time. so many people are going out of business and under working now. 23 million unemployed difference does it make? >> the numbers simply write away the 211,000,000 people stopping to look for people. >> oh, yes. pe
numbers so wrong. jack welch went further obviously the former ceo of g.e. and he said unbelievable jobs numbers. the these chicago guys will do anything. can't debate so they change the numbers. set person who suggested something fishy was going on. >> and of course our own lou dobbs has said no the bureau of labor statistics is insulated entity and peter morris is i on our show a short time ago said no, this isn't the case that they would never cook the books for a white house. that's not something they would do. they are economists and statisticians and there might be anomaly in the numbers. here was jack welch yesterday talking to cavuto and he said something smells funny here, listen. >> these numbers don't smell right when you think about where the economy is right now. every economist this morning predicted roughly 90 to 120,000 and 8.2 unemployment came out very favorably just one tenth of a point below when the president took office. >> well, it's funny when people manipulate numbers back and forth on both sides. i always think about the 23 million people who don't have a job an
and significant decrease in the unemployment rate. jack welch, he went to as far to suggest that the numbers may be manipulated by the obama administration. do you think that the numbers add up? >> i think the suggestion that the numbers was cooked is relatively ridiculous. that being said. economists at the labor department will admit freely that there is a lot of margin of error in these numbers. a month after each job report these numbers are revised upward or downward. the question of the number came out of the household survey, 800,000 plus number, there is a lot of margin for error, possibly as much as 400,000. that is admitted by folks within the labor department, as well. i think you can't get too hung up on the overall numbers because typically these are revised upward or downward. that tends to happen a month later when we stop paying attention. >> heather: what will the numbers do in terms of swaying voters' opinions, specifically undecided voter? do you expect to see a change in the polls as a result of this? >> it's a tough question. i generally think the jobs reports do not move as
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)